A Colorado bill aimed at restricting law enforcement and private companies from purchasing personal data without a warrant failed to advance Wednesday after a 6–5 vote in the House Judiciary Committee.

The proposal, originally titled the “Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act,” had drawn rare support from groups that seldom agree on policy, including the ACLU and Rocky Mountain Gun Owners.

As introduced, House Bill 1037 would have barred government agencies and businesses from buying private personal information from third‑party data brokers. Sponsor Rep. Ken DeGraaf, R‑Colorado Springs, argued in February that the measure was needed to prevent the state from “enabling a surveillance state.”

But nearly two months after its initial hearing, DeGraaf and co‑sponsor Assistant Majority Leader Jennifer Bacon, D‑Denver, returned with a dramatically revised version of the bill. Their amendment stripped the bill’s original language and replaced it with a proposal to send the question to voters in November.

“We have turned into the commodity,” Bacon said. “People are making money off of our actions and our data, and now we’re at the place where we need to know — and I think it’s a fair question on behalf of all of our neighbors — where is this information going?”

Two states have already adopted constitutional privacy protections for personal data, and Bacon said voters are increasingly aware of how their information is collected and used.

“We have an opportunity to let our constituents decide,” she said.

Committee members from both parties raised concerns about the abrupt shift. Rep. Matt Soper, R‑Delta, called the amendment a “major pivot” and said he was uneasy voting on a measure without new testimony. He warned that a poorly drafted ballot measure could unintentionally set the state back in an area of law already heavily litigated.

“I’m just a little bit concerned, the more I’ve thought about it, that if this were to go the wrong way, because there’s always a lot of ifs when you go to the ballot box,” Soper said.

Other lawmakers, including Rep. Yara Zokaie, D‑Fort Collins, argued that the state must confront the growing volume of data collected about residents. She said she would have preferred to keep the issue as state legislation rather than send it to voters, but appreciated the sponsors for elevating the debate.

Supporters pointed to the limits the U.S. Supreme Court placed on the third‑party doctrine in 2018, ruling that police must obtain a warrant to access historical cellphone location data.

Opponents, including district attorneys and law enforcement groups, countered that the bill misinterpreted the Fourth Amendment. They argued that public information — such as names, addresses, and phone numbers — is not constitutionally protected and can be accessed or purchased by investigators.

“This bill would just prevent sworn officers…from getting the information that allows them to do their jobs,” said Jessica Dotter of the Colorado District Attorneys Council.